One of the worst crimes of Pres. Gloria Arroyo is that she abets theplunder of our economy and national treasury through corruption, bribery andanomalous contracts, callously handing out millions of pesos of bribe money tomembers of Congress and other allies to cover up these anomalies while millionsof Filipinos are groveling in hardship and dying of poverty and hunger.More than plunder, however, Pres. Arroyo is also criminally responsible forthe deaths of many Filipinos through a national security policy that allows statesecurity forces to commit heinous human rights violations with impunity, evenrewarding its most vicious perpetrators.This impeachment complaint aims to bring to the fore the crimes of one ofthe most corrupt and brutal presidencies in Philippine history.This impeachment complaint charges Pres. Gloria Arroyo with Betrayal ofPublic Trust, Graft and Corruption, Bribery, Culpable Violation of the Constitution,and other High Crimes. It aims to present evidence, through an impeachmenttrial, sufficient to convict Pres. Arroyo for gross human rights violations, graft andcorruption, bribery and electoral fraud.Since 2001, Respondent Arroyo has indulged in an orgy of corruptionstarting with the $14 million IMPSA payoff while the people inextricably wallowsin poverty to subsidize her plunder of public funds. She has presided over thecrafting and implementation of a National Internal Security Plan, with a militarycomponent called “Oplan Bantay Laya,” causing the perpetration of gross humanrights violations by state forces on innocent victims, mostly leaders and activistsof organizations critical of her administration, and including entire communitiesthroughout the country.

In Re Impeachment of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo,President of the Philippines

2

Obsessed with holding on to power, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo committedelectoral fraud and another round of graft ridden misuse of public funds to ensureher victory in the 2004 elections. She used government resources in, amongothers, the Ginintuang Masagana Ani (GMA) fertilizer fund scam, the Road UsersTax, and PhilHealth to prop up her electoral campaign. She then illegally usedthe powers of her office to ensure her victory through the manipulation of electionresult as exposed by the “Hello Garci” tapes.In order to suppress the rising opposition to her corrupt and illegitimateregime, which drastically escalated after the Hello Garci scandal in 2005, sheagain unleashed the armed forces and the police on the people and increasinglycommitted massive violations of human rights in the form of extra judicial killings,enforced disappearance, torture and the other heinous atrocities. To stem therising anger and wave of protest of the people against such flagrant display ofgreed, corruption and brutality, she abused her executive powers to violateconstitutional rights through Executive Order 464, the Calibrated PreemptiveResponse policy and Proclamation 1017.Respondent Gloria Arroyo, afraid that she would suffer the same fate asPres. Ferdinand Marcos and Pres. Joseph Estrada should evidence against herbe presented in an impeachment proceedings, used bribery and deceit bycausing the filing of sham impeachment complaints which were eventuallydismissed by her allies in Congress in order to immunize her from genuineimpeachment complaints. She failed to realize, however, that the people couldnot be denied their demand for accountability and punishment, as the oppositionagainst her regime drastically increased with each callous disregard of calls foraccountability.The impunity with which she managed to commit her crimes so far hasemboldened her. She was exposed through a Senate inquiry of committing graftand corruption in the negotiations for the ZTE-National Broadband Networkcontract in order to get millions of dollars in kickbacks that would ultimately bepaid by the Filipino people in the form of loan payments.Afraid of an impeachment proceedings that would further expose herinvolvement in the anomalous ZTE-NBN contract, Respondent Gloria Arroyothrew caution to the wind and attempted to bribe members of the House ofRepresentatives and local government officials right in Malacanang Palace inorder to ensure that no genuine impeachment complaint prospers. Unfortunatelyfor Respondent Arroyo, the attempt to bribe government officials was exposed bythe recipients of the bribe money themselves, such as Governors Fr. Ed Panlilioof Pampanga and John Mendoza of Bulacan, and Manila CongressmanBienvenido Abante.It is under this context that today, a comprehensive and genuineimpeachment complaint is filed by the Filipino people. This impeachmentcomplaint is the strongest of all impeachment complaints because it contains theadmission of Respondent’s allies, including members of her political party, of herinvolvement in the ZTE-NBN contract and the subsequent bribery attempt in thepresidential palace. This impeachment complaint contains more direct evidenceagainst respondent for human rights violations with the surfacing of witnesses inthe disappearance of the two UP students Sherlyn Cadapan and Karen Empeño,

In Re Impeachment of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo,President of the Philippines

3

in the Jonas Burgos case and the testimony of others who managed to surviveand escape from their military and police captors proving that indeed, humanrights violations are a result of national policy. The evidence to prove the 2004electoral fraud is now strengthened with the admissions of TSgt. Vidal Doble inan official Senate inquiry.This genuine comprehensive impeachment complaint will test whethermembers of Congress believe in the constitutional principle that ‘public officialsare accountable at all times”. This genuine comprehensive complaint seeks totake Pres. Gloria Arroyo to account for her crimes. The people have found theabove charges against Pres. Arroyo sufficient in substance and form. Membersof the House of Representatives are called upon to heed the voice of theirconstituency and approve the articles of impeachment so that an impeachmenttrial in the Senate can ensue forthwith.This impeachment complaint is a valid complaint that must be received bythe House, referred to the Justice Committee and given due course. Under theConstitution, the Speaker of the House has no recourse but to fulfill hisministerial duty to refer an impeachment complaint to the Justice Committee. TheSpeaker, or any individual member of the House, has no discretion to dismiss orreturn an impeachment complaint, such power being reserved in the Committeeof Justice and the House of Representatives.The people is filing this complaint because, unlike the sham Pulidocomplaint, it is a genuine complaint that contains allegations and evidence toprove the crimes of respondent Gloria Arroyo. The filing of this complaint isintended to give the House of Representatives the chance to correct its self-serving and erroneous rule which protects impeachable officials from publicaccountability by entertaining only one impeachment complaint per year, nomatter how frivolous, and disregarding genuine and legitimate impeachmentcomplaints.The rule previously used by Congress to declare as inadmissible “second”or “subsequent” complaints filed after the filing and referral of a “first”impeachment complaint is without constitutional basis. Section 1, Article XI ofthe Constitution states that: “Public office is a public trust. Public officers andemployees must at all times be accountable to the people x x x “. The samearticle XI also declares in Section 3 [1] that:

Sec. 3 (1) The House of Representatives shall have the exclusive power to initiate all cases of impeachment.

The only time that the House initiates an impeachment case orproceedings is when it approves the Articles of Impeachment. Any impeachmentcomplaint against Pres. Gloria Arroyo may be filed any time before said Article ofImpeachment is approved. The argument of Pres. Arroyo’s allies in Congressthat the impeachment proceedings was initiated when Deputy Speaker Raul delMar referred the complaint filed by Atty. Robert Pulido to the Justice Committeeis a direct violation of the Constitution. Only an action by the House as aninstitution, not by the Speaker or any individual for that matter, can initiate animpeachment proceedings.